Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Am I reading this right, for a Solar detachment with the [chain of command] rule to be given an order it needs to be within "X" of a unit with the HQ ability, not its own HQ, just any HQ?

so in theory you could run, say three armoured formations, and nominate one superheavy as a HQ - then stick it with the two other superheavy detachments as a HQ for them, then say do the same with a Malcador and get a Malcador "company" and ditto with a Leman Russ?

guessing its a simplification but would have thought the whole point of a chain of command is that its a chain

It sounds like that is the case if that is how it is written. I know in SM2 you could use any HQ unit to issue orders (in the same way as Nids used Synapse creatures or Orks followed the orders of any Nobz - except for Blood Axe Nobz of course! ) - but that isn't necessarily the same thing here. I guess you would usually tend to put a detachments HQ next to it, partly so you can remember what is going on and what unit they are part of?

Loss of command isn't quite as big an issue as it was in SM2, as in that game it meant you couldn't move and then could only fire in the advance fire step - so your troops just sat there like lemons if a canny opponent managed to take out the HQ. At least in this case the juggernaut does keep rolling forward.

Yes, any HQ can issue orders to any detachment. Otherwise it would be too restrictive (and book-keeping...).

Yea. It's not supposed to be total cripple. Especially in game this deadly. Nevermind when units with precise weapons show up

can see its a simplification, just seems an odd choice conceptually.

mind you its not alone in that

plus side it does allow "formations" that otherwise couldn't be done by swapping stuff about to get functional blocks that can be assigned to tasks

Then again would troops really not follow another captain if own is dead?

tneva82 wrote:
Then again would troops really not follow another captain if own is dead?

depends, there will be deputies etc but in general terms as I understand it a unit from "A" company, will not recognise the captain from "D" company, especially if from another battalion, so won't follow their orders, nor would said captain expect them to - unless they were specifically appointed as such. largely to prevent enemy tricks with misordering

instead if the captain is killed their assigned deputy would step in, who knew the mission, and would know who to listen to further up the chain

given how rigid the imperium of man is I can see officers being shot for taking orders from the wrong person.

this is in general, on a table its all abstracted anyway.

I was expecting it to be a bit more like how 1st handled it, you have a company of detachments, with its commander who they stay in range of. there is then a battalion of several companies, with a commander who can issue orders to any detachment in the battalion, and then a regimental commander above several battalions who can issue orders to anyone

then space marines sat off to the side wondering how the heck all thats meant to work